Newt Gingrich

Thought this one deserved a thread.



I was hoping the Romney campaign would produce this but it was the Ron Paul campaign that produced it. Whatever you think of Paul or any of the other candidates Newt Gingrich has to be the very worst of them (I'd even take the rent is too damn high guy or anyone else as well).



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CWKTOCP45zY



So it look like Mitt is in on the anti newt gingrich ads as well. He's dropping 3.1 million on these in Iowa over the next couple of weeks.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QpEHU2uoWW8



And here is another ad by the Paul campaign against Gingrich. Romney better pick up his game because Ron Paul's ad team is on fire.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRdqGKA782A&feature=player_embedded

Agree. Newt is the worst of them all. He's the Republican's version of Slick Willy.



Romney also has enough baggage that I not willing to get behind him at this time.

I hate commercials from a candidate bagging on another candidate. Nothing more biased and one-sided than that. Ya gotta love Brian Regan's take on it:



http://comedians.jokes.com/brian-regan/videos/brian-regan---politics/

(sorry the video's not embedded, I couldn't find it on youtube)



I'll admit that I'm not nearly educated enough in any of the candidates political platforms or histories to make on informed vote. It just seems to me like we've had enough politicians and lawyers running things that maybe it's time for someone with more of a business background. That's why, if the vote were today, I'd vote for Mit.



Once finals are over I'll actually have some time to breathe and maybe then I look into these guys and little further.

Well I am sick of politians after what they have done and not done this year. I am voting for any incumbents.

scott715 wrote:
Well I am sick of politians after what they have done and not done this year. I am voting for any incumbents.

Maybe you should consider voting for anyone BUT incumbents? ;)



The problem with Mitt for me is that he thinks that running a government is like running a business. It's not. The government should not be used to control the economy, which is what Obama has been attempting to do, and is what I'm afraid Mitt will try to do.

Right I missed a word.

declocoug wrote:

Well I am sick of politians after what they have done and not done this year. I am voting for any incumbents.

Maybe you should consider voting for anyone BUT incumbents? ;)



The problem with Mitt for me is that he thinks that running a government is like running a business. It's not. The government should not be used to control the economy, which is what Obama has been attempting to do, and is what I'm afraid Mitt will try to do.

I think if a candidate has private-sector experience and actually knows how the economy works, they are much more able to position government to help an ailing economy, which I don't see as trying to control it-which is why Obama is failing miserably.

Schmoe wrote:

scott715 wrote:
Well I am sick of politians after what they have done and not done this year. I am voting for any incumbents.

Maybe you should consider voting for anyone BUT incumbents? ;)



The problem with Mitt for me is that he thinks that running a government is like running a business. It's not. The government should not be used to control the economy, which is what Obama has been attempting to do, and is what I'm afraid Mitt will try to do.

I think if a candidate has private-sector experience and actually knows how the economy works, they are much more able to position government to help an ailing economy, which I don't see as trying to control it-which is why Obama is failing miserably.

I agree. The problem with career polititians is that they're generally ignorant in how real economics work, and live in a fantasy, zero-sum wealth world. They think that the solution to inequality is taking from those who have and giving to those who have not, rather than finding ways to create more wealth for those who have not.



Newt comes off very well in the debates, and that's why he has risen in popularity. I think the reason he's grown so popular here in Iowa is that he's "not Mormon".



Rick Perry is running ads now touting his Christian beliefs. Kind of ironic given that he wouldn't find fault with his pastor for the Mormon-bashing comments made a few weeks ago.

Schmoe wrote:

I think if a candidate has private-sector experience and actually knows how the economy works, they are much more able to position government to help an ailing economy, which I don't see as trying to control it-which is why Obama is failing miserably.

I agree with this, unless you've been as successful as Mitt. Then you're almost as aloof as everyone else. Mitt's run in Massachusetts does not inspire much faith from me. Especially the way he handled the health-care situation there.



And who needs Gore when Romney is spouting this off. "I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that. It's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors." 6/3/2011



Romney is not afraid to use his power as president to get his way (or his friends way, and Mitt has proven time and again that he is willing to pander to certain groups).



Romney still has a lot of work to do before I'll ever vote for him, unless it's Romney vs Obama of course. ;)

@tmoney



For me the negative ads are the only ones to watch. None of the candidates ever say what they are planning on doing in their commercials and you'll never find anything about bad things about a candidate if you only read their websites. How do you propose we find out why we shouldn't vote for certain candidates?



That said Romney needs to fire his ad firm. If they were giving awards for best TV ads Ron Paul wins hands down. Check out the two new ads I've added in the first post

jvquarterback wrote:
@tmoney



For me the negative ads are the only ones to watch. None of the candidates ever say what they are planning on doing in their commercials and you'll never find anything about bad things about a candidate if you only read their websites. How do you propose we find out why we shouldn't vote for certain candidates?



That said Romney needs to fire his ad firm. If they were giving awards for best TV ads Ron Paul wins hands down. Check out the two new ads I've added in the first post

That's a good point. Aren't there any websites that act as independent 3rd parties that list candidates stated political stances, historical voting records and background info about their lives? If there's not, there should be.

tmoney35 wrote:

@tmoney



For me the negative ads are the only ones to watch. None of the candidates ever say what they are planning on doing in their commercials and you'll never find anything about bad things about a candidate if you only read their websites. How do you propose we find out why we shouldn't vote for certain candidates?



That said Romney needs to fire his ad firm. If they were giving awards for best TV ads Ron Paul wins hands down. Check out the two new ads I've added in the first post

That's a good point. Aren't there any websites that act as independent 3rd parties that list candidates stated political stances, historical voting records and background info about their lives? If there's not, there should be.

There are a ton of them that purport to be 3rd party (including a bunch of newspapers) but many of them are run by the campaigns. And the newspapers that are supposed to be third party are anything but. I think the best thing to do is realize you won't get anything unfiltered by someone with an agenda and do the best you can with that.

I have tried to give Newt every benefit of the doubt and keep his positives in the forefront but now that his campaign has come up to full speed, he has blown it for me. He would have done better to keep his mouth shut. Newt has done some good things for America but he has become a political freak show of progressivism. I am finished with Newt.

My opinion: Let Ron Paul put out all of the negative ads on Newt, and let Mitt stay at least a little "above the fray".



Ron Paul came off as insane in last night's debate, and I think the general public understands that. If he wins here in Iowa, I'll be embarrassed. Best chance = Mitt Romney.

Amen Iowa. Elections are about WINNING, nothing else. If you want to make a statement then get out there and actively promote your guy. But you don't make a statement by voting for someone who cannot win, and Gingrich is nothing more than McCain part 2: the anti-Romney candidate who cannot beat Obama!



Let's get this right people. In the polls Romney is the only one who beats Obama head to head. I don't love him as a candidate but this is about winning one for the country.

Not so fast Mizzou. Depending on which polls you look at either all of the candidates can beat Obama or only Romney and Paul can. Only Paul and Romney poll well among independents and only Paul has any significant crossover from the Democrats. Anybody who says only one guy can win is mistaken. It all depends on how good a campaign people run. Mitt has been steady at 20%, Ron Paul has steadily increased to the same in Iowa and the rest have been flashes in the pan.



If I were Romney I'd be more afraid of Paul than I would be of Newt. Newt's numbers are dropping and Paul continues his steady rise. Paul also has a much better ground game in Iowa and New Hampshire.



Oh and BTW Paul is the only candidate with the same foreign policy as that endorsed by Ronald Reagan, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Robert Taft, etc, etc. The majority of Americans agree with Ron Paul's foreign policy and he has the greatest support from the troops. But I guess all those people who have actually picked up and read the 9/11 report must be insane, huh?

Ron Paul will never win. He's the democrats best hope to reelect Obama.

hawkwing wrote:
Ron Paul will never win. He's the democrats best hope to reelect Obama.

You must have missed Public Policy Polling's latest tweet:



"There's actually a legitimate statistical argument that Paul would be the strongest GOP candidate against Obama, period."



https://twitter.com/#%21/ppppolls/status/147745181591015424" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh and here are some more:



ppppolls PublicPolicyPolling

But if Paul somehow won nomination and GOP united around him, his strength with indys would make him tougher foe for Obama than Romney

4 minutes ago



ppppolls PublicPolicyPolling

The reason Romney usually does better v. Obama than Paul overall is many GOP voters say they're undecided in Obama/Paul

5 minutes ago



ppppolls PublicPolicyPolling

Paul performs the best of the Republicans against Obama among independents on almost every poll we ever do

5 minutes ago



ppppolls PublicPolicyPolling

There's actually a legitimate statistical argument that Paul would be the strongest GOP candidate against Obama, period.

6 minutes ago

jvquarterback wrote:
Not so fast Mizzou. Depending on which polls you look at either all of the candidates can beat Obama or only Romney and Paul can. Only Paul and Romney poll well among independents and only Paul has any significant crossover from the Democrats. Anybody who says only one guy can win is mistaken. It all depends on how good a campaign people run. Mitt has been steady at 20%, Ron Paul has steadily increased to the same in Iowa and the rest have been flashes in the pan.



If I were Romney I'd be more afraid of Paul than I would be of Newt. Newt's numbers are dropping and Paul continues his steady rise. Paul also has a much better ground game in Iowa and New Hampshire.



Oh and BTW Paul is the only candidate with the same foreign policy as that endorsed by Ronald Reagan, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Robert Taft, etc, etc. The majority of Americans agree with Ron Paul's foreign policy and he has the greatest support from the troops. But I guess all those people who have actually picked up and read the 9/11 report must be insane, huh?

I take it I have stumbled across an independence disciple...I actually really like Ron Paul, but I hate Obama and his left-leaning/anti-American cronies much more. Again I say elections are about winning and the only thing that matters is that Obama is out.